In my opinion, a positive FOS decision is nothing short of a miracle. In Germany, complaints relating to illegal gambling are regularly rejected. However, lawsuits against the providers are successful.
Why does the FOS reject a complaint or why does it agree with the bank?
Transactions are usually secured using the secure method, 3D-S or verified for VISA. This function is a protective function for the cardholder to avoid fraudulent transactions. When confirmed, the bank assumes that everything is OK with the transactions. After confirmation, the cardholder has usually received something in return, the credit in the casino. Everything that comes after that is a civil dispute. These disputes are usually settled in court; it is not the bank's job to judge this.
Another important point is the following:
If a card payment was verified, then the bank would be liable in the event of a chargeback. If the transactions were paid without verification, the merchant is liable.
However, the bank cannot be held liable because it cannot foresee that the transactions are intended for illegal gambling. The bank does what you want, sends the payment to provider XYZ. The ombudsman only assesses whether the bank made a mistake, but it did not, because you sent the payments in a verified manner.
Automatic translation: